› whether notice issued under s 14(1) of the Stock Act 1915 (Qld) was validly issued
› whether statement of reasons or prior notice are required by law
› where issue of notice is mandatory once the requisite state of mind has been reached
Administrative Law
› JUDICIAL REVIEW
› GROUNDS OF REVIEW
› PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS
› BIAS
› APPREHENSION OF BIAS
› whether issue of a prior quarantine notice meant that the decision-maker would reasonably have been considered to be prejudiced in relation to the new notice
› where there is no evidence that the decision-maker would be unable to bring a fresh mind to consideration of the issues in question
Stock Act 1915 (Qld) s 14
Johnson v Johnson [2000] HCA 48; (2000) 201 CLR 488, cited
Case Details
Citation[2014] QSC 320
CourtQSC
JurisdictionQueensland
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
